you know, clear, convincing dna evidence or whatever they wanted, fingerprints on the duct tape. is that what happened? >> it can be one of the things that happened, jon. unfortunately, as technology moves forward when you talk about dna 15 years ago, that was considered, perhaps, little voodoo science, nobody really knew about dna. but, unfortunately, people do watch shows like csi, and they think it is that simple, that you are always going to find a fingerprint, that you're always going to have dna. and the reality is the majority of cases don't have that. and that's, you know, is it reasonable doubt because there wasn't dna? what are the chances that there would actually be dna or fingerprints? so there is a total csi effect in all cases across the country. people expect it's going to be that easy. jon: phillip, you're a former prosecutor. i heard from a buddy of mine who says that the prosecution in this case didn't wear the white hat well enough. they were smirking, they were laughing at times in court, and they just didn't look the part.